A further Illustration of the same.
Being thus deluded before the Fall, it is no wonder if their conceptions
were deceitful, and could scarce speak without an Error after. For, what
is very remarkable (and no man that I know hath yet observed) in the
relations of Scripture before the Flood, there is but one speech
delivered by Man, wherein there is not an erroneous conception; and,
strictly examined, most hainously injurious unto truth. The pen of
_Moses_ is brief in the account before the Flood, and the speeches
recorded are but six. The first is that of _Adam_, when upon the
expostulation of God, he replied; _I heard thy voice in the Garden, and
because I was naked I hid my self_. In which reply, there was included a
very gross Mistake, and, if with pertinacity maintained, a high and
capital Error. For thinking by this retirement to obscure himself from
God, he infringed the omnisciency and essential Ubiquity of his Maker,
Who as he created all things, so is he beyond and in them all, not only
in power, as under his subjection, or in his presence, as being in his
cognition; but in his very Essence, as being the soul of their
causalities, and the essential cause of their existencies. Certainly,
his posterity at this distance and after so perpetuated an impairment,
cannot but condemn the poverty of his conception, that thought to
obscure himself from his Creator in the shade of the Garden, who had
beheld him before in the darkness of his Chaos, and the great obscurity
of Nothing; that thought to fly from God, which could not fly himself;
or imagined that one tree should conceal his nakedness from Gods eye, as
another had revealed it unto his own. Those tormented Spirits that wish
the mountains to cover them, have fallen upon desires of minor
absurdity, and chosen ways of less improbable concealment. Though this
be also as ridiculous unto reason, as fruitless unto their desires; for
he that laid the foundations of the Earth, cannot be excluded the
secrecy of the Mountains; nor can there any thing escape the
perspicacity of those eyes which were before light, and in whose opticks
there is no opacity. This is the consolation of all good men, unto whom
his Ubiquity affordeth continual comfort and security: And this is the
affliction of Hell, unto whom it affordeth despair, and remediless
calamity. For those restless Spirits that fly the face of the Almighty,
being deprived the fruition of his eye, would also avoid the extent of
his hand; which being impossible, their sufferings are desperate, and
their afflictions without evasion; until they can get out of
_Trismegistus_ his Circle, that is, to extend their wings above the
Universe, and pitch beyond Ubiquity.
The Second is that Speech of _Adam_ unto God; _The woman whom thou
gavest me to be with me, she gave me of the Tree, and I did eat_. This
indeed was an unsatisfactory reply, and therein was involved a very
impious Error, as implying God the Author of sin, and accusing his Maker
of his transgression. As if he had said, If thou hadst not given me a
woman, I had not been deceived: Thou promisedst to make her a help, but
she hath proved destruction unto me: Had I remained alone, I had not
sinned; but thou gavest me a Consort, and so I became seduced. This was
a bold and open accusation of God, making the fountain of good, the
contriver of evil, and the forbidder of the crime an abettor of the
fact prohibited. Surely, his mercy was great that did not revenge the
impeachment of his justice; And his goodness to be admired, that it
refuted not his argument in the punishment of his excusation, and only
pursued the first transgression without a penalty of this the second.
The third was that of _Eve; The Serpent beguiled me, and I did eat_. In
which reply, there was not only a very feeble excuse, but an erroneous
translating her own offence upon another; Extenuating her sin from that
which was an aggravation, that is, to excuse the Fact at all, much more
upon the suggestion of a beast, which was before in the strictest terms
prohibited by her God. For although we now do hope the mercies of God
will consider our degenerated integrities unto some minoration of our
offences; yet had not the sincerity of our first parents so colourable
expectations, unto whom the commandment was but single, and their
integrities best able to resist the motions of its transgression. And
therefore so heinous conceptions have risen hereof, that some have
seemed more angry therewith, than God himself: Being so exasperated with
the offence, as to call in question their salvation, and to dispute the
eternal punishment of their Maker. Assuredly with better reason may
posterity accuse them than they the Serpent or one another; and the
displeasure of the _Pelagians_ must needs be irreconcilable, who
peremptorily maintaining they can fulfil the whole Law, will
insatisfactorily condemn the non-observation of one.
[Sidenote: _The Devill knew not our Saviour to be God when he tempted
him._]
The fourth, was that speech of _Cain_ upon the demand of God, _Where is
thy brother?_ and he said, _I know not_. In which Negation, beside the
open impudence, there was implied a notable Error; for returning a lie
unto his Maker, and presuming in this manner to put off the Searcher of
hearts, he denied the omnisciency of God, whereunto there is nothing
concealable. The answer of Satan in the case of _Job_, had more of
truth, wisdom, and Reverence, this; _Whence comest thou Satan?_ and he
said, _From compassing of the Earth_. For though an enemy of God, and
hater of all Truth, his wisdom will hardly permit him to falsifie with
the All-mighty. For well understanding the Omniscience of his nature, he
is not so ready to deceive himself, as to falsifie unto him whose
cognition is no way deludable. And therefore when in the tentation of
Christ he played upon the fallacy, and thought to deceive the Author of
Truth, the Method of this proceeding arose from the uncertainty of his
Divinity; whereof had he remained assured, he had continued silent; nor
would his discretion attempt so unsucceedable a temptation. And so again
at the last day, when our offences shall be drawn into accompt, the
subtilty of that Inquisitor shall not present unto God a bundle of
calumnies or confutable accusations, but will discreetly offer up unto
his Omnisciency, a true and undeniable list of our transgressions.
The fifth is another reply of _Cain_ upon the denouncement of his curse,
_My iniquity is greater then can be forgiven_: For so it is expressed in
some Translations. The assertion was not only desperate, but the conceit
erroneous, overthrowing that glorious Attribute of God, his Mercy, and
conceiving the sin of murder unpardonable. Which how great soever, is
not above the repentance of man; but far below the mercies of God, and
was (as some conceive) expiated in that punishment he suffered
temporally for it. There are but two examples of this error in holy
Scripture, and they both for Murder, and both as it were of the same
person; for Christ was mystically slain in _Abel_, and therefore _Cain_
had some influence on his death as well as _Judas_; but the sin had a
different effect on _Cain_, from that it had on _Judas_; and most that
since have fallen into it. For they like _Judas_ desire death, and not
unfrequently pursue it: _Cain_ on the contrary grew afraid thereof, and
obtained a securement from it. Assuredly, if his despair continued,
there was punishment enough in life, and Justice sufficient in the mercy
of his protection. For the life of the desperate equalls the anxieties
of death; who in uncessant inquietudes but act the life of the damned,
and anticipate the desolations of Hell. 'Tis indeed a sin in man, but a
punishment only in Devils, who offend not God but afflict themselves, in
the appointed despair of his mercies. And as to be without hope is the
affliction of the damned, so is it the happiness of the blessed; who
having all their expectations present, are not distracted with
futurities: So is it also their felicity to have no Faith; for enjoying
the beatifical vision, there is nothing unto them inevident; and in the
fruition of the object of Faith, they have received the full evacuation
of it.
[Sidenote: Cain, _as the Rabbins think, was the man slain by_ Lamech,
_Gen. 4, 23._]
The last speech was that of _Lamech, I have slain a man to my wound, and
a young man in my hurt_: If _Cain_ be avenged seven fold, truly _Lamech_
seventy and seven fold. Now herein there seems to be a very erroneous
Illation: from the Indulgence of God unto _Cain_, concluding an immunity
unto himself; that is, a regular protection from a single example, and
an exemption from punishment in a fact that naturally deserved it. The
Error of this offender was contrary to that of _Cain_, whom the
_Rabbins_ conceive that _Lamech_ at this time killed. He despaired in
Gods mercy in the same Fact, where this presumed of it; he by a
decollation of all hope annihilated his mercy, this by an immoderancy
thereof destroyed his Justice. Though the sin were less, the Error was
as great; For as it is untrue, that his mercy will not forgive
offenders, or his benignity co-operate to their conversions; So is it
also of no less falsity to affirm His justice will not exact account of
sinners, or punish such as continue in their transgressions.
Thus may we perceive, how weakly our fathers did Erre before the Floud,
how continually and upon common discourse they fell upon Errors after;
it is therefore no wonder we have been erroneous ever since. And being
now at greatest distance from the beginning of Error, are almost lost in
its dissemination, whose waies are boundless, and confess no
circumscription.